Video: Simon Hughes on the Liberal Democrats’ 10:10 campaign motion

The 10:10 campaign is calling for a commitment to a 10% cut in the UK’s carbon emissions in 2010. It’s aimed at individuals, businesses, schools, politicians – in fact, everyone in the UK.

At 4pm today, Parliament will be debating the following motion, submitted by Simon Hughes MP, the Liberal Democrat Shadow Energy & Climate Change Secretary:

Political response in the UK to climate change

Submitted by: Nick Clegg, Vince Cable, Simon Hughes, Martin Horwood, David Heath, Paul Burstow

That this House believes it is vital that the UK demonstrates political leadership at all levels in response to the climate crisis, and that this is particularly important ahead of the United Nations Climate Change summit in Copenhagen if there is to be an international agreement which will avert the worst effects of catastrophic climate change; further believes that immediate practical responses to the crisis should include a massive expansion of renewable energy and energy efficiency and a commitment for all homes in Britain to be warm homes within ten years; acknowledges that action taken now to tackle the climate crisis will cost less than action taken in the future; notes the declared support of Labour and Conservative frontbenchers to the objective of the 10:10 campaign which calls for 10 per cent greenhouse gas emission reductions by the end of 2010; agrees that the House will sign up to the 10:10 campaign; calls on Her Majesty’s government and all public sector bodies now to make it their policy to achieve a 10 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by the end of 2010; and further calls on the government to bring a delivery plan before this House by the end of 2009 on how these objectives will be achieved.

You can join the 10:10 campaign here.

Read more by or more about , , , , , or .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

3 Comments

  • Pete Ridley 21st Oct '09 - 5:27pm

    You politicians need to step back and take a look at the claims being made about global climate change and the state of scientific understanding of climate processes and drivers. You give the impression of being convinced that our use of fossil fuels is causing significant climate change yet it is clear that very few of you, if any, have bothered to check out the facts. If you had you’d find that there is no convincing evidence supporting The (significant human-made global climate change) Hypothesis. The evidence has not been found yet, the case has not yet been proven, but you are supporting the verdict, making judgements and imposing penalties.

    Many of the UN’s objectives, which are behind the 10:10 and related proposals, are sound. Reducing waste of any resource, including energy, is praiseworthy. Redistribution of wealth in a more equitable manner is praiseworthy. Global governance I’m not so sure about. What I find so disgusting is the dishonest manner through which these objectives are being pursued. It is another example, like the expenses scandal, of political duplicity which totally undermines the confidence of the voters in their representatives.

    Take a look in the mirror and ask yourself if you have any real understanding of what you are being told about climate change. If you can honestly say “Yes, I know why what is being claimed is valid” then present the evidence that has convinced you so that we can consider it ourselves. No politician has done so yet. Why? Because they cannot.

    Best regards, Pete Ridley, Human-made global climate change agnostic.

  • As I said previously, it is time that our politicians tried to get a proper understanding of the science of climate processes and drivers instead of swallowing the UN propaganda about it. Out use of fossil fuels has little if any impact upon global climates, as more and more scientists are confirming. The UN’s proposed treaty for the Copenhagen Climate Change Convention (COP15) has two primary objectives:-
    1) redistribution of wealth from developed to developing nations,
    2) setting up a framework for global government.

    Just as this Labour Government is prepared to sigh away our sovereignty to the EU it is prepared to ultimately sign it over to the UN. What is worse is that opposition politicians are not prepared to stand up and fight to retain our sovereignty. You should be ashamed of yourselves. This is even more damaging to our democracy than politicans’ expenses scandal.

    I’ve just had a read through the latest draft UN treaty on Climate Change (Note 1) and it’s frightening. One of my major concerns is that it invokes (rather than restates) text about redistribution of wealth from developed to developing economies, which is one of the main reasons for this UN propaganda in support of The (significant human-made global climate change) Hypothesis. What the latest draft says is QUOTE: Financial flows for mitigation will be sourced and governed in a transparent and balanced manner in line with [chapter 4][paragraphs 173 and 174] (of FCCC/AWGLCA/2009/INF.1) [text][agreement].] UNQUOTE. That’s just over one line of text, easy to skip over. Para. 173 from FCCC/AWGLCA/2009/INF.1 22 June 2009 is not just a line of text but covers pages 156 – 160 so must not be overlooked. This would be very easy to do, since it does not even appear as “small print” in the latest draft. I suspect that this was done quite deliberately, but then I am a sceptic. Come on PeggyB, convince me that my concerns are exaggerated.

    Page 85 Para. 64 says QUOTE: An Executive Body on Finance and Technology for Mitigation (EBFTM), accountable to the COP, shall be established. UNQUOTE. This is the part of the UN’s global government that will collect and distribute funds collected from global taxpayers.

    It is claimed on Page 86 Para. 68 c) that QUOTE: Have an equitable and geographically balanced representation of all Parties within a transparent and efficient system of governance UNQUOTE. It goes on to say on Page 137 Para. 22 QUOTE: The COP shall appoint a board which shall function under the authority and guidance of and be accountable to the COP, to manage the financial mechanism and the related facilitative mechanism, funds and bodies, which shall have an equitable and balanced representation of all Parties within a transparent system of governance, to address all aspects of the means of implementation for developing countries, for both adaptation and mitigation. UNQUOTE.
    I don’t recognise this as “western style” democracy but more akin to some of the dictatorships which are already receiving from the developed nations vast sums which never reach the deprived people for whom it is intended.. Come on DigitA, I’m sure you’ll have something to say about this “conspiracy theory”.

    This draft agreement goes on and on in this manner, with horrendous consequences for developed economies if it is approved by our representatives, yet how good an understanding do they (or ourselves) have of its implications. There are several paragraphs that typify the politically correct nonsense coming out of the UN, e.:-.
    Page 6 PP15 QUOTE: Further acknowledging that developed countries have a historical responsibility for their disproportionate contribution to the causes and consequences of climate change, reflecting their disproportionate historical use of a shared global carbon space since 1850 as well as their proposed continuing disproportionate use of the remaining global carbon space. UNQUOTE.
    Page 7 Para. 4 QUOTE: 4. [Developing countries face not only the additional challenge of adaptation but also the need to put their economies on a sustainable path. All Parties agree that developing countries face serious adverse effects of climate change as well as threats to their future economic potential due to insufficient access to shared global atmospheric resources.] UNQUOTE.
    Page 7 Para. 6 QUOTE: These adverse effects [also] [further] [undermine the equitable development needs of present andfuture generations] [demand a more equitable utilization of the global atmospheric resource to reflect the needs of present and future generations], and have a range of direct and indirect implications for the full and effective enjoyment of human rights including the right to self determination, statehood, life, food and health and the right of a people not to be deprived if its own means of subsistence, particularly in developing countries. UNQUOTE.

    And so it goes on for page after page after page. They even bring “sex” and “gender” into the debate.
    Para 56 QUOTE: and recognizing gender equity as an integral part of effective implementation of adaptation UNQUOTE and Page 55 Para 63 QUOTE: utilizing scientific as well as sex-disaggregated socioeconomic data UNQUOTE ???!!!!!

    What a farce – and our representatives are swallowing it all with hardly a whimper.
    NOTES:
    1) see http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2009/awglca7/eng/inf02.pdf
    Best regards, Pete Ridley, Human-made global climate change agnostic.

  • I previously tried to post a long comment on The (significant human-made global climate change) Hypothesis which was rejected as looking like spam. This is a summary.
    1) It is time that our politicians put an end to supporting the UN’s climate change propaganda. The Hypothesis remains to be validated and more and more evidence is being found to show that it is fatally flawed.
    2) imposing a tax on carbon emissions will achieve nothing as far as controlling global climates but will cause significant but unnecessary hardship to developed economies.
    3) Australian politicians are recognising this fact and are now prepared to admit it.

    Take a look at this video then in the mirror and ask yourself what you would vote for if you were an ordinary citizen.
    http: //www.youtube.com/watch?v=79s9y94s0wg&feature=player_embedded “

    Best regards, Pete Ridley, Human-made global climate change agnostic.

One Trackback

  • […] Lib Dem Voice yesterday covered the video Simon Hughes made to highlight the Lib Dems’ opposition day motion on climate change, and the 10:10 campaign’s call for a commitment to a 10% cut in the UK’s carbon emissions in 2010. The Lib Dems’ motion was straightforward: That this House believes that it is vital that the UK demonstrates political leadership at all levels in response to the climate crisis, and that this is particularly important ahead of the United Nations Climate Change summit in Copenhagen if there is to be an international agreement which will avert the worst effects of catastrophic climate change; further believes that immediate practical responses to the crisis should include a massive expansion of renewable energy and energy efficiency and a commitment for all homes in Britain to be warm homes within 10 years; acknowledges that action taken now to tackle the climate crisis will cost less than action taken in the future; notes the declared support of Labour and Conservative frontbenchers to the objective of the 10:10 campaign which calls for 10 per cent. greenhouse gas emission reductions by the end of 2010; agrees that the House will sign up to the 10:10 campaign; calls on Her Majesty’s Government and all public sector bodies now to make it their policy to achieve a 10 per cent. reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by the end of 2010; and further calls on the Government to bring a delivery plan before this House by the end of 2009 on how these objectives will be achieved. […]

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • Jenny Barnes
    It's clear that the human population is in overshoot. Well over the carrying capacity of the Earth. However, there is some goodish news. Fertility rates are...
  • expats
    I went onto the Daily Express website (reckoning that most support for Sunak's 'National Service' would be from a readership that are right wing and JUST too yo...
  • Peter Hirst
    Scandals are part of our life but we can minimise their effect. One way is to detect them earlier through better transparency and accountability. We have endure...
  • Jack Nicholls
    Thank you Yusuf 😊...
  • Peter Hirst
    The elephant in the room to your blog is inequality. Many of the policies you outline reflect the disastrous levels of inequality that corrupt our society. Many...